Research article

Atmos. Chem. Phys., 22, 7959–7973, 2022

https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-22-7959-2022
© Author(s) 2022. This work is distributed under
the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 License.

Continental thunderstorm ground enhancement

observed at an exceptionally low altitude
Ivana Kolmašová1,2 , Ondřej Santolík1,2 , Jakub Šlegl3,4 , Jana Popová1 , Zbyněk Sokol1 , Petr Zacharov1 ,
Ondřej Ploc3 , Gerhard Diendorfer5 , Ronald Langer6,3 , Radek Lán1 , and Igor Strhárský6
1 Institute of Atmospheric Physics, Czech Academy of Sciences, Prague, Czechia
2 Faculty of Mathematics and Physics, Charles University, Prague, Czechia
3 Nuclear Physics Institute, Czech Academy of Sciences, Husinec-Řež, Czechia
4 Faculty of Nuclear Sciences and Physical Engineering, Czech Technical University in Prague, Prague, Czechia
5 Department of ALDIS, OVE Service GmbH, Vienna, Austria
6 Institute of Experimental Physics, Slovak Academy of Sciences, Košice, Slovakia

Correspondence: Ivana Kolmašová (iko@ufa.cas.cz)

Received: 16 February 2022 – Discussion started: 1 April 2022

Revised: 21 May 2022 – Accepted: 3 June 2022 – Published: 20 June 2022

Abstract. Two long-lasting thunderstorm ground enhancement (TGE) events were registered at the Milešovka
meteorological observatory in Czechia (50.55◦ N, 13.93◦ E; 837 m altitude) on 23 April 2018, during linearly
organized thunderstorms. Two intervals of increased photon counts were detected by a plastic scintillator, respec-
tively lasting 70 and 25 min and reaching 31 % and 48 % above the background radiation levels. Using numerical
simulations, we verified that the observed increases in count rates are consistent with the energy spectrum of pre-
viously observed TGEs. We investigated the relevant data from a suite of meteorological instruments, a Ka-band
cloud radar, an electric field mill, and a broadband electromagnetic receiver, all placed at the Milešovka ob-
servatory, in order to analyse the context in which these unique continental TGEs occurred at an exceptionally
low altitude. The onset of the TGEs preceded the onset of precipitation by 10 and 3 min, respectively, for the
two events. Both this delayed rain arrival and an energy threshold of 6.5 MeV for registered particles clearly
exclude the detection the decay products of the radon progeny washout during the TGE intervals. At the same
time, the European lightning detection network EUCLID detected numerous predominantly negative intracloud
lightning discharges at distances closer than 5 km from the particle detector, while the occurrence of cloud-to-
ground discharges was suppressed. The cloud radar recorded presence of graupel below the melting level, and
the composition of hydrometeors suggested good conditions for cloud electrification. The observed variations in
the near-surface electric field were unusual, with very brief negative-electric-field excursions reaching −20 kV
in a quick succession. At the same time, sub-microsecond unipolar pulses emitted by close corona discharges
saturated the broadband magnetic loop antenna. All these measurements indicate that a strong lower positive-
charge region was present inside the thundercloud. The bottom thundercloud dipole was probably responsible
for acceleration of the seed electrons in the air. These seed electrons might originate in the secondary cosmic ray
particles but could also come from a high concentration of radon in the air collected during the propagation of the
convective system above the uranium-rich soils before the thunderstorms overpassed the Milešovka observatory.

Published by Copernicus Publications on behalf of the European Geosciences Union.

7960
1 Introduction
“Thunderstorm ground enhancement” events are defined as
increased fluxes of electrons, neutrons, gamma rays, or X
rays, which are registered by particle detectors located on
the Earth’s surface during thunderstorms (Chilingarian et al.,
2010, 2011, 2015, 2016, 2019; Kudela et al., 2017; Chum et
al., 2020). These phenomena are also known as “prolonged
radiation bursts” (Tsuchiya et al., 2011), “gamma glows from
the ground” (Dwyer et al., 2012), “prolonged gamma ray en-
hancements” (Shepetov et al., 2021), or “gamma ray bursts
of atmospheric origin” (Brunetti et al., 2000). The first con-
clusive measurements of these “X-ray enhancements” clearly
related to thunderstorms were obtained using aeroplanes
(Parks et al., 1981), followed by “X-ray increases” on bal-
loons (Eack et al., 1996) and by airborne measurements of
“gamma ray glows” (Kelley et al., 2015; Kochkin et al., 2017;
Østgaard et al., 2019). However, the first theoretical predic-
tion of “extremely penetrating radiation of beta or gamma
ray type” was published by Wilson (1925), who hypothesized
that beta radiation might come from energetic electrons, ac-
celerated by thunderstorm electric fields from the seed pop-
ulation of decay products of cosmic rays or radionuclides of
terrestrial origin, while the gamma component might come
from bremsstrahlung after collisions of these electrons with
the air molecules. Given the above-documented fact that
most papers on this subject coin their proper term to name
these interesting phenomena, we have a wide choice of possi-
ble names, of which we chose the term “thunderstorm ground
enhancement (TGE)”, which currently occurs most often in
the literature.
The main complications for observations of TGEs were
(a) emissions originating in the decay chain of the radon
(mostly 214 Br and 214 Pb) washed out from the air by rain
and (b) a highly absorbing column of the air between the
cloud base and the detector (Dwyer et al., 2012). The origin
of radon and its progeny in the air was explained (Chilin-
garian et al., 2020a) by their attaching to charged aerosols
after being lifted by the near-surface electric field to the air.
Their radiation then can be registered by particle detectors
simultaneously with the TGE particles. Rain quickly returns
some of the isotopes back to the ground. In the absence of
rain, the radiation from the air can continue for 1–2 h un-
til radon progeny finally decays. The exclusion of the radon
progeny washout and its subsequent decay products (at en-
ergies below 3 MeV) in the registered counts started to be
possible with an extension of measured particle energies up
to 10 MeV. The absorption can be minimized by choosing
observational places with a short distance between the cloud
base and the detector. This is the reason why the TGEs were
up to now exclusively observed at high-mountain observato-
ries (Brunetti et al., 2000; Torii et al., 2009; Chilingarian et
al., 2011, 2015, 2016; Kudela et al., 2017; Chum et al., 2020;
Shepetov et al., 2021) or at the sea level during Japanese win-
ter storms with extremely low cloud base altitudes (Tsuchiya
Atmos. Chem. Phys., 22, 7959–7973, 2022
I. Kolmašová et al.: Gamma glow observed at low altitude
et al., 2011; Kuroda et al., 2016). Typically, the TGEs last
from 1 min up to 10–15 min, and the radiation mostly does
not exceed 10 % of the background values. Nevertheless, ex-
treme events exceeding several times the background values
were also registered (Chilingarian et al., 2010; Chum et al.,
2020).
Chilingarian et al. (2012) introduced a two-component
model for the TGE generation, which includes the relativistic
runaway electron avalanche (RREA) process originally pro-
posed by Gurevich et al. (1992) for the thunderstorm electric
fields above the RREA threshold, together with the modifi-
cation of electron energy spectra (MOS) process for high-
energy electrons and for electric fields both below and above
the RREA threshold. RREA might be responsible for mul-
tiplication of particle flux up to 10 times above the back-
ground of secondary cosmic rays in the energy range up to
30–40 MeV. The MOS process can add only several per cent
particle flux to the background values, but the energy ex-
tends up to 100 MeV. Dwyer and Uman (2014) showed that
an avalanche could be produced in the thundercloud electric
fields if energetic seed electrons are provided, for example,
by secondary cosmic rays. Energetic runaway electrons then
generate high-energy photons through the bremsstrahlung in-
teractions with air atoms. These high-energy photons can
reach energies of tens of megaelectronvolts. A transfer of
energy of the thundercloud electric field to the electrons
from the ambient population of the cosmic rays leads to a
modification of electron energy spectra and to an additional
bremsstrahlung and might also be responsible for the tail of
the TGE gamma ray spectra up to 100 MeV (Chilingarian
et al., 2012). Using the observed enhancements of photon
and electron fluxes measured by the upper scintillator of SE-
VAN at Lomnický štít (2634 m altitude) and their comparison
with the simulations of the RREA, Chilingarian et al. (2021)
showed that the potential difference present in the thunderous
atmosphere might reach approximately 500 MV.
It was shown by simultaneous measurements of parti-
cle fluxes and near-surface electric fields that TGEs usu-
ally occurred during large values of negative electric fields,
which accelerate electrons downwards. Nevertheless, TGEs
were occasionally detected also during positive electric fields
(Zhou et al., 2016; Kudela et al., 2017; Bartoli et al., 2018;
Chum et al., 2020). TGEs are usually not associated with in-
dividual lightning strokes, but quite often they are reduced or
terminated abruptly by a nearby lightning discharge (Kudela
et al., 2017; Chilingarian et al., 2017a; Chum et al., 2020;
Soghomonyan et al., 2021; Kochkin et al., 2021). TGEs
are often observed during time intervals with an increased
occurrence of inverted intracloud lightning, which is dis-
charges between the main negative-charge region and the
lower positive-charge region (LPCR), and during a lower oc-
currence of negative cloud-to-ground (CG) lightning strokes
(Chilingarian et al., 2018, 2020b). This scenario suggests
an existence of a strong LPCR inside the thundercloud,
which blocks the propagation of negative leaders down to
https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-22-7959-2022
I. Kolmašová et al.: Gamma glow observed at low altitude
the ground (Nag and Rakov, 2009; Iudin et al., 2017). This
arrangement of charges inside the thundercloud also suggests
that electrons from the cosmic ray secondaries are acceler-
ated and multiplied in the bottom thundercloud dipole, which
is formed by the main negative-charge layer and the LPCR
(Chilingarian et al., 2017b). This led to a speculation that the
intensity of TGEs reached the maximum when the LPCR was
directly above the detector, and the counts decreased when
the cloud moved away. Such movement of clouds would ex-
plain a large variety in durations and intensities of the ob-
served TGEs. This effect was reported by Torii et al. (2009),
who identified a migrating source of high-energy photons at-
tributed to the thundercloud movement using simultaneous
registrations of TGEs, measurements of the near-surface at-
mospheric electric field, and meteorological radar echoes at
several points along the Japanese coast.
The mechanism of the LPCR formation is still not fully
understood. It is typically located just below the freezing
level. Rakov and Uman (2003) proposed several hypothet-
ical sources of positive charge, which can contribute to its
accumulation close to the lower cloud boundary. The source
of positive charge might be associated with graupel, which
is supposed to be positively charged at temperatures warmer
than the reversal temperature. Valuable contribution to the
LPCR puzzle can be added by information about the thun-
dercloud microphysical structure: a mixture of hydromete-
ors such as that of graupel, ice, snow, and supercooled water
is considered prone to cloud electrification (Rakov, 2016).
Such data can be delivered by millimetre Doppler polari-
metric radars, which investigate the cloud microphysics at
high temporal and spatial resolutions (Görsdorf et al., 2015;
Kollias et al., 2007; Clothiaux et al., 1995). Positive charge
might be also generated by corona discharges at ground level
and transferred to an altitude of the cloud base (Chauzy and
Soula, 1999). This corona mechanism was also assumed to
act as the main contributor to the evolution of the LPCR in
the study of Nag and Rakov (2009), who evaluated the role
of the LPCR in facilitating different types of lightning. Elec-
tromagnetic pulses emitted by corona discharges might be
identified in fast electromagnetic recordings from their mi-
crosecond durations, unipolarity, and random distributions
(Arcanjo et al., 2021). Unipolar microsecond-scale pulses
were found to accompany in-cloud processes as dart lead-
ers or K changes, but these appeared in several-hundred-
microsecond-long pulse trains with regular inter-pulse inter-
vals (Rakov et al., 1992; Kolmašová and Santolík, 2013).
Therefore, these pulses can be distinguished from the char-
acteristic radiation from local corona discharges observed in
electromagnetic recordings. Arcanjo et al. (2021) found that
corona current pulses measured at a shunt resistor have fast
rise times (tens of nanoseconds) and slow decays (hundreds
of nanoseconds). They also found that the pulse cadence was
correlated with the ambient electric field measured at a dis-
tance of 250 m. Pulses related to positive corona discharges
were reported to be no longer observed for ambient electric
https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-22-7959-2022
7961
fields weaker than −1.8 kV m−1 . A threshold for negative
corona pulses was higher, reaching about 3.8 kV m−1 .
The first attempt to examine enhancements of gamma ray
background, previously attributed solely to radon progeny,
was reported at the territory of Czechia by Šlegl et al. (2019).
The authors used the data from the Czech Radiation Moni-
toring Network (RMN), which is operated by the State Office
for Nuclear Safety, and investigated gamma background en-
hancements with respect to the proximity of thunderstorms.
They found that increased exposure levels at individual RMN
stations observed during close thunderstorms could not be
explained by the radon progeny itself and suggested that they
might have been attributed also to TGEs.
In the present study, we investigate conditions which led to
the observation of two TGE events detected by a particle de-
tector at the Milešovka meteorological observatory (Czechia,
837 m a.s.l) on 23 April 2018, using the data collected by a
set of instruments: an electric field mill, a broadband electro-
magnetic receiver, and a Ka-band cloud radar. We combine
these measurements with meteorological data (temperature,
precipitation, air pressure, dew point temperature) and with
data provided by the European lightning location network
EUCLID. In Sect. 2, we describe the instrumental set-up and
the dataset. In Sect. 3, we describe the meteorological situ-
ation during the thunderstorms occurring on 23 April 2018.
In Sect. 4, we present results of our analysis of the particle
registrations. In Sect. 5, we analyse electrostatic and elec-
tromagnetic measurements and investigate characteristics of
lightning detected by EUCLID during the analysed thunder-
storms. In Sect. 6, we introduce the relevant observations of
the cloud radar. In Sect. 7, we describe the simulation of ob-
served particle fluxes. In Sect. 8, we discuss and summarize
our results.
2 Instrumentation and dataset
The Milešovka meteorological observatory is located on
the top of the Milešovka mountain (a.k.a. Donnersberg;
50.55◦ N, 13.93◦ E; 837 m a.s.l.) in Czechia as it is 400 m
higher than the surrounding terrain and has a 360◦ view un-
obstructed by obstacles. Its meteorological and climatolog-
ical measurements are continuous and date back to 1905.
It is located in the stormiest region in the Czech territory,
with about 3.2 CG flashes km−2 yr−1 (Novak and Kyznarova,
2020, Fig. 9a therein).
For registration of particles we use the Space Environ-
ment Viewing and Analysis Network (SEVAN) detector de-
scribed in detail by Chilingarian et al. (2009). The basic SE-
VAN unit is composed of standard slabs of 50 × 50 × 5 cm
plastic scintillators. Between two identical assemblies of
100 × 100 × 5 cm scintillators (four standard slabs) are two
100 × 100 × 5 cm lead absorbers, and in the middle there is a
thick 50 × 50 × 25 cm scintillator stack (five standard plastic
scintillator slabs). Scintillator light-capture cones and photo-
Atmos. Chem. Phys., 22, 7959–7973, 2022
7962
multiplier tubes are located on the top and bottom and in the
intermediate layers of the detector. The slabs are sealed in
a box made of 1 mm thick steel plate. The events described
in this study were detected by the middle plastic scintillator
stack of SEVAN, which was installed without the shielding
lead absorber inside the building of the Milešovka observa-
tory. The majority of the incoming increased radiation came
through a concrete wall and a nearby window (see the de-
tailed simulation results in Sect. 7). The energy threshold for
the photomultiplier was set between 6.5 and 7.5 MeV. The
counts are stored with a 1 min cadence. The energy of indi-
vidual particles is not measured.
The vertical electrostatic field is measured by the electric
field mill EFM 100 manufactured by the Boltek company.
The field mill is installed in an inverted position to mini-
mize the noise originating from precipitation. The electric
field is sampled at a cadence of 50 ms. Negative values at the
field mill output correspond to an upward-pointing electric
field in which the electrons are accelerated downward. Two
perpendicular broadband magnetic loop antennas (SLAVIA,
shielded loop antenna with a versatile integrated amplifier)
are used to measure the time derivative of variations in the
horizontal magnetic field from 5 kHz up to 90 MHz (Kol-
mašová et al., 2018, 2020, 2022). The gain of the integrated
preamplifiers is remotely controlled. The SLAVIA sensors
are coupled with a digital oscilloscope sampling at a fre-
quency of 200 MHz, and the digitized signal is numerically
integrated. The broadband analyser is working in a triggered
mode based on a predefined amplitude threshold: when it re-
ceives a trigger, it records a 168 ms long waveform snapshot
including a history of 52 ms before the trigger. The trigger
time is assigned by the GPS receiver with an accuracy of 1 µs.
The analyser is triggered by strong signals emitted by differ-
ent lightning phenomena as return strokes (RSs), intracloud
(IC) discharges, or preliminary breakdown pulses. In the case
of a close thunderstorm, it is also triggered by very fast sub-
microsecond pulses radiated by corona-type discharges oc-
curring at the tips of close metallic objects due to the strong
electric field below the thundercloud. In this study, we use
the measurements of the antenna oriented in the east–west
direction.
The vertically oriented cloud radar was installed at the
Milešovka observatory in 2018. It is a Doppler polarimet-
ric radar (MIRA 35c), which was manufactured and installed
by METEK GmbH (http://metek.de/, last access: 16 Febru-
ary 2022). It transmits an electromagnetic signal within the
Ka-band with a centre frequency of 35.12 ± 0.1 GHz and a
peak power of 2.5 kW. The radar core is of a magnetron type,
and the radar antenna is of the Cassegrain type, with a di-
ameter of 1 m, a gain of 48.5 dB, and a beam width of 0.6◦ .
The pulse repetition frequency varies from 2.5 to 10 kHz and
the pulse width from 100 to 400 ns. The unambiguous veloc-
ity range (±VNyquist) is ±10.65 m s−1 . The radar registers
Doppler spectra, which correspond to averages of 40 con-
secutive values above the noise floor. The values below the
Atmos. Chem. Phys., 22, 7959–7973, 2022
I. Kolmašová et al.: Gamma glow observed at low altitude
estimated noise floor are deemed to have no signal. The in-
ternal software of the radar provides three moments of the
Doppler spectra, such as radar reflectivity (Z), Doppler ver-
tical velocity (DVV), and spectrum width, and derives other
quantities such as the linear depolarization ratio (LDR) or
signal-to-noise ratio. The temporal resolution of the cloud
radar is approximately 2 s, while its vertical resolution cov-
ers 509 gates, which are 28.8 m apart from one another. The
relatively narrow melting layer can be often detected in the
radar reflectivity plots as a region with enhanced reflectivity
due to sudden changes in the hydrometeor properties (shape,
size, and melting fraction) at temperatures below and above
0 ◦ C (Ryzhkov and Zrnic, 2019). The method of the hydrom-
eteor classification used in this study was described by Sokol
et al. (2018), and its refined version was reported in Sokol
et al. (2020). Prior to the hydrometeor classification, we cor-
rect the DVV values using the de-aliasing procedure and esti-
mate the vertical air velocity (VAV). The calculation of VAV
is based on a common approach according to which the very
small particles (i.e. tracers) are so light that they are con-
sidered to be carried by the air only, which means that their
velocity determines the VAV (Kollias et al., 2001; Gossard,
1994; Shupe et al., 2004). The hydrometeor classification as-
sumes that the terminal velocity varies from one hydrome-
teor class to another, and the hydrometeor classes naturally
depend on the ambient air temperature. The classification
scheme uses the information about the altitude of the melting
layer. Below the melting layer, snow or ice cannot exist be-
cause they have small terminal velocities and almost imme-
diately melt in the melting layer or just below it. Therefore,
only graupel, hail, cloud droplets, and rain can appear be-
tween the ground level and the melting layer. Thus, based on
the ambient air temperature, on the terminal velocity range
of hydrometeors, and on the shape of particles determined by
LDR, five hydrometeor classes are distinguished in our clas-
sification: cloud liquid water, rain, graupel, hail, and ice/s-
now (Sokol et al., 2020). Based on this classification, we
can suggest areas where cloud electrification occurred; how-
ever, our radar does not directly measure the charge struc-
ture of the cloud. It is not a fully polarimetric radar and does
not measure quantities like KDP (differential reflectivity) or
ZDR (specific differential phase), which were used, together
with the lightning mapping array data, for example by Big-
gerstaff et al. (2017) to retrieve the locations of charge cen-
tres.
3 Thunderstorms on 23 April 2018
A cold front belonging to a pressure low over the Norwe-
gian Sea was travelling to central Europe and replaced a
warm central European air mass with cool maritime polar
air. During the day, the CAPE (convective available poten-
tial energy) values gradually increased from almost zero at
00:00 UTC to roughly 800 J kg−1 at the Prague-Libuš (CZ)
https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-22-7959-2022
I. Kolmašová et al.: Gamma glow observed at low altitude
and Meiningen and Kümmersbruck (both DE) sounding sta-
tions. The CAPE increase was accompanied by CIN (con-
vective inhibition) decrease, which supported the evolution
of convective storms. According to the radar measurements
from the CZRAD network operated by the Czech Hydrome-
teorological Institute (Novák, 2007) and EUMETSAT satel-
lite measurements, the morning storms in Germany produced
a nicely evolved gust front, which produced a squall line
crossing the north-west of the Czech Republic at midday. The
origin of the squall line was supported by a direct hodograph
with almost no directional shear and a considerable deep-
layer shear (0–6 km) around 15 m s−1 . The storms crossing
the Milešovka observatory in the afternoon were also lin-
early organized; however, they did not evolve into a squall
line like the morning storms. The thunderstorms described in
this study occurred around noon (from 10:40 to 13:20 UTC)
and in the evening (from 17:00 to 17:50 UTC) and we re-
spectively marked them “storm A” and “storm B”. The lin-
ear organization of both storms is clearly visible in Fig. 1,
where black crosses in both panels show the location of the
Milešovka observatory.
The information about the temperature, relative humidity,
air pressure, wind speed and its direction, precipitation to-
tals, duration of sunshine, and other meteorological param-
eters is available from the measurements of the automatic
Vaisala weather station. For our study, we use the precipita-
tion totals measured in a 1 min cadence, which are shown by
blue lines in Figs. 2a and 3a. To estimate an altitude of the
cloud base we assume that it in simplicity corresponds to the
lifted condensation level (LCL) (Daidzic, 2019), which we
calculated from the temperature at a level of 2 m and the dew
point temperature. Note that this estimation is quite rough as
during the precipitation the calculation might be influenced
by an increased relative humidity and decreased temperature.
The LCL height represents the altitude of the lowest possi-
ble cloud base, and the error in the LCL height estimation
when using this simple method could reach 15 % (Lawrence,
2005). Red stars in Figs. 2a and 3a display the altitudes of
the LCL above the Milešovka mountain during both storms.
(Note that all altitudes in Figs. 2 and 3 are relative to the al-
titude of the Milešovka station of 837 m a.s.l.) The altitude
of the cloud base was estimated to decrease from 1100 to
200 m above the station during storm A. During storm B, the
height of the cloud base varied between 180 and 240 m. The
0 ◦ C level was located at an altitude of about 2 km above the
cloud radar.
4 Particle measurements
The middle scintillator of the SEVAN detector, which was
placed close to the window inside the observatory building,
detected around 3500 counts min−1 during the undisturbed
conditions.
https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-22-7959-2022
7963
The count enhancements observed during storms A and
B are shown in Figs. 2a and 3a, respectively, by black
lines. During storm A, the particle counts started to grow at
11:05 UTC, reached a maximum of about 4600 counts min−1
in 10 min, and dropped in the next 10 min nearly to
the normal count rate. This significant increase of 31 %
was later followed by two weaker enhancements of 18 %
and 14 %. The fluctuations in the count rate lasted for
about 70 min. During storm B, the count rate started
to grow at 17:10 UTC, reached a maximum of about
5200 particles min−1 at 17:23 UTC, and dropped to the nor-
mal count rate at 17:33 UTC. The maximum count increase
was unusually large, reaching 48 %. The precipitation rate
shown by blue lines in Figs. 2a and 3a started about 10 min
after the count increase during storm A (Fig. 2a) and about
3–4 min later than the count increase in the case of storm B
(Fig. 3a). The estimated cloud base was respectively found
200–1100 and 180–240 m above the observatory, during the
count increases in storm A (Fig. 2a) and storm B (Fig. 3a).
The most intense parts of the TGE events happened when the
cloud base was located at about 800 m during storm A and at
about 200 m during storm B.
5 Electromagnetic measurements
5.1 Electric field mill measurement and EUCLID
detections
Variations in the atmospheric electric field measured by the
electric field mill during the investigated events are shown by
grey lines in Figs. 2b, c and 3b, c, respectively. The field mill
data show small values of the electric field until 10:45 UTC
and since 13:10 UTC during storm A due to the fair-weather
current flowing from the ionosphere to the ground. In the case
of storm B, the electric field waveform exhibited small peaks
also before 16:55 UTC and after 17:45 UTC. These peaks can
be assigned to lightning discharges that occurred more than
5 km away from the sensor. Significant variations in the elec-
tric field were detected when the thundercloud was located
above the field mill from 10:45 to 13:10 UTC and from 16:55
to 17:45 UTC, respectively, during storms A and B. The max-
imum values reached ±20 kV. Surprisingly, negative peaks in
the electric field records dominated until 11:25 UTC during
storm A, and only negative pulses were observed during the
whole period of storm B. Negative electric field excursions
were very short and followed in a quick succession. Such
variations in electric fields near the ground are not typical.
Rapid changes in polarity in the otherwise slowly varying
atmospheric electric field usually correspond to the neutral-
ization of the charge in the thundercloud due to close IC or
CG discharges. Detections of the European lightning location
network EUCLID, limited up to 5 km from the Milešovka ob-
servatory, are displayed in Figs. 2b and 3b by coloured sym-
bols. Red and blue crosses are used for positive and negative
CG discharges, respectively. Red and blue diamonds show
Atmos. Chem. Phys., 22, 7959–7973, 2022
7964
Figure 1. Maps of radar reflectivity for the most intense parts of storm A (a) and storm B (b). Black crosses show location of the Milešovka
observatory (source: http://www.chmi.cz on 23 April 2018).
positive and negative IC discharges. The negative sign indi-
cates the movement of the negative charge downward. A sub-
stantial lack of CG discharges may be noted. The negative IC
discharges, also called inverted IC flashes, were clearly asso-
ciated with periods of negative excursions of the atmospheric
electric field, and their occurrence can thus be considered to
be the primary case of the observed negative peaks. However,
inverted IC flashes were detected by EUCLID only for some
of the observed negative peaks. The amplitudes of negative
peaks also clearly do not correspond to the reported peak cur-
rents of the inverted IC flashes. Note that the IC and CG clas-
sification accuracy depends on the polarity and strength of
the discharge and reaches about 80 %, while the misclassi-
fied strokes were generally very weak (Schwalt et al., 2020).
5.2 Broadband magnetic field measurement
The trigger of the broadband analyser was nearly constantly
activated during the time when the thundercloud was located
above the observatory. The cadence of the 168 ms long wave-
form snapshots was mainly given by the ability of the anal-
yser to store and transfer the data. The maximum number
of three to four snapshots per second were recorded during
the time of the intense variations in the atmospheric electric
field, when the limitations of the throughput of our acqui-
sition system were reached. A total of 474 snapshots sam-
pled at 200 MHz were recorded from 10:12 to 13:20 UTC
during storm A. During storm B, a set of 159 snapshots was
recorded from 17:35 to 17:58 UTC.
An example of a waveform snapshot is shown in Fig. 4.
Figure 4a displays the complete numerically integrated
waveform; Fig. 4b shows the raw signal measured by the
antenna. The waveforms also include a history of 52 ms
recorded before the trigger. After the time of the trig-
ger, the signal frequently reached the digital saturation of
±2040 telemetry units (TMU), where 1 TMU corresponds
Atmos. Chem. Phys., 22, 7959–7973, 2022
I. Kolmašová et al.: Gamma glow observed at low altitude
to 76 µT s−1 . As the antenna measures the time derivative
of the magnetic field, the repeated saturation indicates very
fast changes in the magnetic field. A thorough look at the
waveform details reveals that the records are composed of a
mixture of pulses of different shapes, widths, and polarities.
This mixture is not surprising: the analyser is able to detect
the RS pulses and IC pulses occurring a few hundred kilo-
metres from their causative discharge, and in the case of a
very close storm it is often saturated by fast pulses emitted
by corona discharges appearing at the tips of close metallic
objects. Fast unipolar pulses with a width of tens of nanosec-
onds which originated in close corona discharges are shown
in Fig. 4c and f.
The rapidly changing polarity indicates either that the
corona discharges arose at different directions with respect
to the axis of the magnetic loop antenna or that both negative
and positive corona discharges occurred. We are not able to
distinguish between these two possibilities by our measure-
ments. Figure 4d shows an intense bipolar pulse at 76.24 ms
probably emitted by a close IC discharge. A typical RS pulse
is recognizable in Fig. 4e at 77.43 ms and might have been
generated by a distant CG discharge.
All waveform snapshots are composed of a mixture of
pulses, and a large part of snapshots recorded during active
parts of both storms reached the negative or positive digital
saturation levels or both. We therefore calculated the max-
imum range of measured raw values for all 633 waveform
snapshots. The obtained values are plotted by black crosses
in Figs. 2c and 3c. The maximum range of 4080 TMU is rep-
resented by solid red lines. It is clearly visible that during
intense negative excursions of the atmospheric field during
storm B, saturation was reached during nearly all recorded
waveform snapshots.
https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-22-7959-2022
I. Kolmašová et al.: Gamma glow observed at low altitude 7965

Figure 2. Storm A: (a) particle counts per minute (black line), precipitation totals in millimetres per minute (blue line), the altitudes of the
lifted condensation level in kilometres above the altitude of 837 m – Milešovka observatory (red stars); (b) fluctuations in the vertical electric
field measured by electric field mill (grey line), EUCLID detections – red and blue colour for positive and negative discharges, diamonds
for IC discharges, and crosses for CG discharges; (c) fluctuations in the vertical electric field (grey line), absolute maximum of the range
of values measured by the broadband antenna (in telemetry units; each black cross corresponds to the maximum range of the magnetic
field derivative recorded during one 168 ms long waveform snapshot) – red line shows the saturation in both positive and negative polarity
(4096 TMU); (d) the radar reflectivity; (e) vertical updraught velocity; (f) classification of hydrometeors (G – graupel, H – hail, I – ice, S –
snow, C – cloud water, R – rain).

https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-22-7959-2022 Atmos. Chem. Phys., 22, 7959–7973, 2022

7966 I. Kolmašová et al.: Gamma glow observed at low altitude

Figure 3. The same as in Fig. 2 but for storm B.

Atmos. Chem. Phys., 22, 7959–7973, 2022 https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-22-7959-2022

I. Kolmašová et al.: Gamma glow observed at low altitude 7967

Figure 4. Example of a 168 ms long magnetic field waveform snapshot measured by a broadband antenna. (a) Integrated magnetic field
waveform, (b) the time derivative of the magnetic field fluctuations (the trigger was activated at 52 ms), (c–f) 20–300 µs long details indicated
by arrows in panel (a), (c) sub-microsecond unipolar pulses emitted by corona discharges, (d) a bipolar pulse emitted probably by a strong
close IC discharge, (e) a RS-type pulse, (f) mixture of different pulses. Note that the numerically integrated values might be inaccurate
because of a frequent saturation of the received signal.

6 Cloud profiler measurements
6.1 Storm A
Figure 2d shows the time evolution of the radar reflectivity
factor, which we measured by the cloud radar, during the
first thunderstorm event (11:00–14:00 UTC approximately).
It clearly depicts that the values of reflectivity, especially
during the first half of the event, reach or exceed 30 dB
in most of the vertical profile. The vertical extent is up to
10 km, suggesting a vertically developed thundercloud sit-
uated above the Milešovka observatory. Based on high re-
flectivity values, we can assume that the melting layer was
at a height of approximately 2 km above the radar and that
up to 13:20 UTC precipitation occurred at lower elevations.
This altitude of the melting layer corresponded to the value
calculated from the measured ground temperature (using a
gradient of −6.5 ◦ C km−1 ) and served as an input for the hy-
drometeor classification. The lower reflectivity values during
the second half of the event represent the rear part of the
squall line, where slighter precipitation than in the front part
is located; Fig. 2e displays the time evolution of DVV, where
the upward motion is depicted by positive values, while the

https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-22-7959-2022 Atmos. Chem. Phys., 22, 7959–7973, 2022

7968
downward motion is depicted by negative values. Positive
values, i.e. upward motion, prevail in upper elevations, while
negative values, i.e. downward motion, dominate lower ele-
vations and suggest fallout of greater (i.e. precipitation) par-
ticles. Hydrometeor distribution as it resulted from the al-
gorithm by Sokol et al. (2020) during the first thunderstorm
event is depicted in Fig. 2f. Naturally, most of the higher el-
evations consist of ice and snow, while the lower elevations
consist of liquid cloud water and rain. However, it is worth
noting that during the first half of the event, we also detected
graupel and hail in the lowest elevations, which can be re-
lated to heavy precipitation. Interestingly, from about 5 to
9 km above the radar at 11:45 UTC approximately, there is a
mixture of graupel and hail surrounded by ice and snow and
supercooled liquid cloud water. This might be a place where
the process of cloud electrification could be expected accord-
ing to the widely accepted theory of cloud electrification by
collisions of graupel with ice and snow particles in the pres-
ence of supercooled cloud liquid water.
6.2 Storm B
Figure 3d shows the time evolution of the measured radar re-
flectivity by the cloud radar during the second thunderstorm
event. As compared to the first thunderstorm event, it is ob-
vious that the vertical extent of the cloud during the second
thunderstorm event is much lower, up to approximately 6 km
above the radar. This may be related to the fact that the cloud
radar is only vertically pointing and thus does not see the
whole thundercloud horizontally. In the case of this thun-
derstorm, the cloud radar likely scanned a side part of the
thunderstorm instead of its core, as can be seen in Fig. 1b.
However, the radar reflectivity values are as high as dur-
ing the first thunderstorm event, suggesting a possible fall-
out of precipitation. The melting height is hardly definable
from the radar measurements in this case, so for the hydrom-
eteor classification we have to calculate it from the measured
ground temperature. The gap in measurements from 17:20
to 17:30 UTC from about 2 to 6 km can be related to atten-
uation of the radar signal by heavy rain, but the reflectivity
values are pretty low, or more likely it simply corresponds to
the fact that the cloud was not that extensive at that time. The
time evolution of DVV is displayed in Fig. 3e. In contrast
to the first thunderstorm event, the upward motion reaches
lower values in general, while the downward motion is simi-
lar to the first event, suggesting precipitation fallout. As far as
the hydrometeor distribution during the second thunderstorm
event is concerned, Fig. 3f shows that the time from 17:20
to 17:30 UTC is the most interesting as all the hydrometeor
classes were detected at that time, though the cloud is too low
to draw any conclusions out of it. Further, the distribution is
expectable and similar to the first event with, for example,
a predominance of cloud water and rain at the lowest eleva-
tions.
Atmos. Chem. Phys., 22, 7959–7973, 2022
I. Kolmašová et al.: Gamma glow observed at low altitude
7 Simulation of particle fluxes
The installation of the particle detector SEVAN was not the
same as for other measurement sites, and the obtained counts
thus are not directly comparable with the existing TGE re-
ports. We therefore verify the enhancement of counts in our
detector for a known TGE energy spectrum (Chilingarian et
al., 2012) using the PHITS (Particle and Heavy Ion Transport
code System) Monte-Carlo-based program for particle trans-
port simulations. We use the version 3.24 released in 2021
together with the INCL, EGS5, and KUROTAMA models.
We also used the PHITS cosmic ray source mode based on
PARMA/EXPACS (Sato et al., 2018; Boudard et al., 2013;
Iida et al., 2007; Sato, 2015, 2016).
The geometry of the detector installation inside the obser-
vatory building is simplified as an inner space of air with
dimensions of 4 × 4 × 3 m on the x, y, and z axes (where z
is pointing up vertically), surrounded by concrete walls with
a width of 80 cm. At a height of 1 m there is a 1 m high win-
dow opening with a width of 0.5 m. The opening is filled
with 2 mm thick glass. A plastic scintillator with a sensitive
volume of 50 × 50 × 25 cm is placed at a distance of 40 cm
from the window and 100 cm above the floor. The scintillator
is covered with a 1 mm thick steel plate, which represents the
scintillator box. On the top of the concrete ceiling, a wooden
plate with a thickness of 3 cm and a steel plate with a thick-
ness of 1 mm represent the roof. This environment is visible
as a black rectangular shape in Fig. 5a.
As the first step, we test our set-up by comparing
measured and calculated background count rates originat-
ing in the secondary cosmic ray particles. The measured
background rate was around 3500 counts min−1 (Figs. 2a
and 3a). The PHITS’s cosmic ray source for the specific
date, height, and geometry gives us a total number of
3640 ± 135 counts min−1 for the energy higher than 6.5 MeV
deposited in the scintillator (3432 ± 118 muons min−1 ; the
rest include electrons and positrons, photons, and neutrons).
The calculated count fits the observation well.
As we do not measure the energetic spectrum for the
TGE events observed at Milešovka, we use a known TGE
spectrum measured at the Aragats observatory on 4 Octo-
ber 2010 (Chilingarian et al., 2012) when the count en-
hancement in the middle SEVAN scintillator reached about
1400 counts min−1 , which is similar to our observation. The
background level was about 7100 counts min−1 (http://adei.
crd.yerphi.am/, last access: 21 May 2022). The source ge-
ometry is represented by a square of 3 × 3 m located at a
distance of 3 m from the detector in order to minimize the
influence of scattered particles. The direction of the parti-
cle beam is perpendicular to the source plate, and the de-
tector is approximately in the middle of the beam. The
dead time of the detector is not taken into account due to
the fast response of the plastic scintillator and due to the
very high energy threshold. The source is composed only
of photons. The electrons are not included as their ability
https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-22-7959-2022
I. Kolmašová et al.: Gamma glow observed at low altitude
Figure 5. (a) TGE source particles. The source is tilted by 45◦ from the vertical axis, and the energy spectra correspond to observations by
Chilingarian et al. (2012; their Fig. 12). (b) Calculated deposit energy spectra inside the scintillator. An energy threshold was set to 6.5 MeV
according to the set-up of the detector. The detector itself does not provide the energy spectra.
to cross the concrete walls or the window and to deposit
enough energy in the scintillator is negligible. According
to Chilingarian et al. (2012), the photon differential inten-
sity I in particles min−1 MeV−1 m−2 can be represented as
−1
I = 4.5 × 105 e−(0.25 E MeV ) for photon energies E from 5
−1
to 10 MeV and I = 6.3 × 107 e−(3.3 E MeV ) for photon ener-
gies E from 10 to 100 MeV. By integrating the spectrum over
all energies, we get the total number of photons in the source
equal to 5.05 × 105 photons min−1 m−2 . If we place the pho-
ton source on the top of the simulated environment and slant
it by 45◦ to let the particles enter the window, the area of the
detector (small box at coordinates x = 50, z = 0 in Fig. 5a) is
hit by approximately 1 source particle cm−2 min−1 . The sur-
face of the detector perpendicular to the beam is 2652 cm2 .
The spectrum of particle energies absorbed in the scintil-
lator and originating solely from the TGE source (without
cosmic rays) is shown in Fig. 5b. The count rate of parti-
cles with an energy range from 6.5 to 100 MeV deposited
in the detector can be estimated using the T-deposit tally as
(977 ± 3) particles min−1 . This number represents a 27 % in-
crease in the count rates relative to the background, which is
roughly consistent with the observed peak count rates (31 %
and 48 %, respectively, for storm A and storm B in Figs. 2a
and 3a). We have also calculated the count enhancements for
other inclinations of the beam. We verified that the enhance-
ments calculated for an inclination of 45◦ best reproduced
our measurements. To obtain the same values for a beam ar-
riving more vertically to the detector we would need to as-
sume a stronger TGE. A more horizontal inclination of the
beam seems to be not realistic.
8 Discussion and summary
Two significant TGE events were registered on 23 April 2018
at the Milešovka observatory in Czechia at 837 m a.s.l. To
https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-22-7959-2022
7969
the best of our knowledge, it was the first multi-instrument
TGE observation below 1 km a.s.l. outside Japan. The regis-
tered increases in photon count reached 31 % and 48 % above
the background level during thunderstorms A and B, respec-
tively. The duration of TGEs was unusually long in compari-
son with other reports (Chum et al., 2020; Chilingarian et al.,
2017a, b, 2020b), lasting about 70 min (storm A) and about
25 min (storm B). The increased counts were detected by a
plastic scintillator of the particle detector SEVAN (Chilin-
garian et al., 2009). Rain appeared with a delay of several
minutes after the count increases during both events.
This delayed rain arrival and an energy threshold of
6.5 MeV for registered particles in the scintillator clearly ex-
clude the presence of the radon progeny washout and its sub-
sequent decay in the count rates. Using the simulations, we
have shown that the observed increases in count rates might
have been related to TGEs. We also verified that no extreme
cosmic ray events were detected during these observations
(https://gle.oulu.fi/#/, last access: 20 February 2022).
A question, however, remains as to why only these two
TGE events were registered at the Milešovka observatory,
while the particle measurement was operational also in the
thunderstorm seasons 2020 and 2021. Based on long-term
observations (Kašpar et al., 2017), meteorological data from
23 April 2018 do not indicate any extreme-weather event.
The TGE events were observed during two convective storms
with well-organized multi-cells, but neither precipitation to-
tals (Figs. 2a, 3a) nor the maximum wind speed of 14 m s−1
exceeded values observed during numerous thunderstorms
occurring in the same area in 2020 and 2021. The obser-
vatory was not inside the thundercloud as was the case of
TGEs observed at the high-mountain observatory (Chum et
al., 2020). The cloud base was respectively found at least 200
and 180 m above the observatory during storm A and B. The
0 ◦ C level was located at an altitude of about 2 km above
Atmos. Chem. Phys., 22, 7959–7973, 2022
7970
the cloud radar. An estimated height of the cloud tops dur-
ing storm A was about 11 km (Fig. 2d–f), as expected in the
midlatitudes. The cloud tops during storm B were lower, at
about 8 km (Fig. 3d–f), indicating that the storm centre of the
second storm was not directly above the cloud radar. The up-
draught velocities reached typical values of 10 m s−1 . During
both storms, the cloud radar recognized graupel below the
melting level. Based on the classification of the hydromete-
ors using the Ka-band cloud radar data, the composition of
hydrometeors suggested good but not extreme conditions for
the cloud electrification.
Analysis of electromagnetic measurements (broadband
magnetic field data, records of the vertical electric field mon-
itor and EUCLID lightning detections) reveals several inter-
esting characteristics of the investigated thunderstorms. Vari-
ations in near-surface electric fields observed during both
storms were very different compared to previous observa-
tions during TGE events, reported for example by Chum
et al. (2020) and Chilingarian et al. (2017b, 2020a). In our
case, the data showed a completely untypical behaviour: neg-
ative electric field excursions were very short and followed
each other in a quick succession. Some of them were asso-
ciated with inverted IC strokes detected by EUCLID, none
of which, however, abruptly reduced or terminated the TGE
flux. We cannot rule out that short-duration TGE events of
tens of seconds could have been reduced (Kochkin et al.,
2021) or terminated (Chum et al., 2020; Chilingarian et al.,
2017b, 2020b) by a lightning stroke as these would not be
recognizable in the 1 min cadence SEVAN data. A frequent
occurrence of IC lightning and a low occurrence of CG light-
ning indicate a presence of a strong, lower positive-charge
region. The increases in the TGE radiation corresponded in
time to the frequent occurrence of large negative electric
field pulses (up to −20 kV m−1 ) corresponding most prob-
ably to inverted IC strokes. We also identified numerous sub-
microsecond-scale pulses in the broadband magnetic field
records, which often saturated the preamplifier (Fig. 4b) and
can be attributed to corona-type discharges occurring at close
metallic objects near the receiving antenna in high local elec-
tric fields below the thundercloud. Note that visible sparks
were not expected to be reported by the observatory staff dur-
ing the daytime. These fast unipolar pulses tens of nanosec-
onds in width (shown in detail in Fig. 4e) are similar to pulses
emitted by corona discharges in Arcanjo et al. (2021). Unlike
Arcanjo et al. (2021) we cannot distinguish between pulses
emitted by positive and negative corona discharges as their
polarity is dependent not only on the direction of the corona
current but also on the relative orientation of the magnetic
loop to the source discharge. Based on the simulation by Kaš-
par et al. (2015) the unipolar character of pulses indicates
a high propagation velocity of the current waves, short dis-
charge channels, or both, which is consistent with expected
properties of corona-type discharges.
All electromagnetic measurements indicate a presence of
a strong LPCR:
Atmos. Chem. Phys., 22, 7959–7973, 2022
I. Kolmašová et al.: Gamma glow observed at low altitude
a. an increased occurrence of inverted IC lightning,
b. a suppressed occurrence of CG lighting,
c. a presence of irregularly distributed narrow unipolar
pulses linked to strong corona discharges which might
have been contributing to the delivery of additional pos-
itive charge to the cloud base.
Moreover, the cloud radar identified graupel, which is sup-
posed to carry a positive charge at temperatures above the
melting level (Takahashi, 1978). LPCR inside the thunder-
cloud is probably responsible for an adequately high electric
field in the bottom thundercloud dipole between LPCR and
the main negative-charge region extending over at least 2 km,
as we can estimate from the hydrometeor classes observed by
the cloud radar. This extended charge structure was probably
capable of accelerating seed electrons, and as a result, we
observed significant long-lasting bremsstrahlung.
The exceptionality of the observation raises the question
of whether the secondary cosmic ray particles, which might
have been substantially attenuated at the altitude of the ob-
servatory, were the only source of the seed electrons. It is
possible that a substantial part of the seed electrons might
have originated in a high concentration of radon in the air
collected above the uranium-rich soils during a rainless pe-
riod before the thunderstorms overpassed the area (https:
//remap.jrc.ec.europa.eu/Atlas.aspx#, last access: 20 Febru-
ary 2022).
In summary, our multi-instrument data recorded during
two continental thunderstorms on 23 April 2018 reveal that
TGEs can occur at an altitude lower than 1 km a.s.l. The
uniqueness of these TGE registrations implicates the idea
that the observational conditions might have been unusu-
ally favourable. The meteorological situation allowed for a
formation of a strong, lower positive-charge region with its
lower edge located close to the observatory, assuming the
lower edge of the LPCR was located at the cloud base at the
beginning of the storm (Rakov and Uman, 2003).
The altitude of the cloud base varied between 1100 and
200 m above the observatory during storm A and between
240 and 180 m during storm B. Nevertheless, the LPCR is
a transient phenomenon which moves down with positively
charged falling graupel. Therefore, it is probable that the
LPCR might have been located even closer to the detector
during the graupel fall, when we observed the particle flux
maxima. The presence of a lower positive-charge region was
indirectly confirmed by the electromagnetic measurements,
with a possible contribution from local corona discharges,
and by the cloud radar data. The bottom thundercloud dipole
was probably capable of accelerating the seed electrons in
the air. These seed electrons might, besides the usually con-
sidered source from the secondary cosmic rays, also origi-
nate from radon in the air collected in this specific region. A
follow-up study is needed to test the absence of a large LPCR
in other storms without recorded TGEs.
https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-22-7959-2022
I. Kolmašová et al.: Gamma glow observed at low altitude
Data availability. The electromagnetic-field, particle, and meteo-
rological data are available at https://doi.org/10.17632/p27tzscvb3.
1 (Kolmašová, 2022).
Author contributions. IK and OS designed the study and inter-
preted the results. JS and OP analysed the particle data and per-
formed the flux simulations. JP and ZS analysed and interpreted the
cloud profiler data. PZ described the meteorological context. GD
provided the EUCLID data. RaL, RoL, and IS were responsible for
the instrumentation and data storage. The paper was written by IK,
OS, JP, and PZ.
Competing interests. The contact author has declared that nei-
ther they nor their co-authors have any competing interests.
Disclaimer. Publisher’s note: Copernicus Publications remains
neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and
institutional affiliations.
Acknowledgements. The work was supported by the GACR
grant 20-09671S and by the European Regional Development Fund
CRREAT project (CZ.02.1.01/0.0/0.0/15_003/0000481).
Financial support. This research has been supported by the
Grantová Agentura České Republiky (grant no. 20-09671S)
and the Ministerstvo Školství, Mládeže a Tělovýchovy (Eu-
ropean Regional Development Fund CRREAT project, grant
no. CZ.02.1.01/0.0/0.0/15_003/0000481).
Review statement. This paper was edited by Heini Wernli and
reviewed by Ashot Chilingarian and Martino Marisaldi.
References
Arcanjo, M., Montanyà, J., Urbani, M., Lorenzo, V., and
Pineda, N.: Observations of corona point discharges from
grounded rods under thunderstorms, Atmos. Res., 247, 105238,
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.atmosres.2020.105238, 2021.
Bartoli, B., Bernardini, P., Bi, X. J., Cao, Z., Catalanotti, S., Chen,
S. Z., Chen, T. L., Cui, S. W., Dai, B. Z., Amone, A. D., Lu-
obu, D., De Mitri, I., Ettorre Piazzoli, B. D., Di Girolamo, T.,
Di Sciascio, G., Feng, C. F., Feng, Z., Feng, Z., Gao, W., Gou,
Q. B., Guo, Y. Q., He, H. H., Hu, H., Hu H., Iacovacci, M.,
Iuppa, R., Jia, H. Y., Ren, L., Li, H. J., Liu, C., Liu, J., Liu,
M. Y., Lu, H., Ma, L. L., Ma, X. H., Mancarella, G., Mari, S.
M., Marsella, G., Mastroianni, S., Montini, P., Ning, C. C., Per-
rone, L., Pistilli, P., Salvini, P., Santonico, R., Shen, P. R., Sheng,
X. D., Shi, F., Surdo, A., Tan, Y. H., Vallania, P., Vernetto, S.,
Vigorito, C., Wang, H., Wu, C. Y., Wu, H. R., Xue, L., Yang,
Q. Y., Yang, X. C., Yao, Z. G., Yuan, A. F., Zha, M., Zhang,
H. M., Zhang, L., Zhang, X. Y., Zhang, Y., Zhao, J., Ren, Z.,
https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-22-7959-2022
7971
Zhu, Z., Zhou, X. X., Zhu, F. R., Zhu, Q. Q., and Alessandro,
F. D.: Observation of the thunderstorm-related ground cosmic
ray flux variations by ARGO-YBJ, Phys. Rev. D, 97, 042001,
https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevD.97.042001, 2018.
Biggerstaff, M. I., Zounes, Z., Addison Alford, A., Carrie,
G. D., Pilkey, J. T., Uman, M. A., and Jordan, D. M.:
Flash propagation and inferred charge structure relative to
radar-observed ice alignment signatures in a small Florida
mesoscale convective system, Geophys. Res. Lett., 44, 8027–
8036, https://doi.org/10.1002/2017GL074610, 2017.
Boudard, A., Cugnon, J., David, J.-C., Leray, S., and
Mancusi, D.: New potentialities of the Liège intranu-
clear cascade model for reactions induced by nucleons
and light charged particles, Phys. Rev., C87, 014606,
https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevC.87.014606, 2013.
Brunetti, M., Cecchini, S., Galli, M., Giovannini, G., and
Pagliarin, A.: Gamma-ray bursts of atmospheric origin in
the MeV energy range, Geophys. Res. Lett., 27, 1599–1602,
https://doi.org/10.1029/2000GL003750, 2000.
Chauzy, S. and Soula, S.: Contribution of the ground corona ions to
the convective charging mechanism, Atmos. Res., 51, 279–300,
1999.
Chilingarian, A., Hovsepyan, G., Arakelyan, K., Chilingaryan,
S., Danielyan, V., Avakyan, K., Yeghikyan, A., Reymers, A.,
and Tserunyan, S.: Space environmental viewing and anal-
ysis network (SEVAN), Earth Moon Planets, 104, 195–210,
https://doi.org/10.1007/s11038-008-9288-1, 2009.
Chilingarian, A., Daryan, A., Arakelyan, K., Hovhannisyan, A.,
Mailyan, B., Melkumyan, L., and Hovsepyan, G.: Ground-based
observations of thunderstorm correlated fluxes of high-energy
electrons, gamma rays, and neutrons, Phys. Rev. D, 82, 043009,
https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevD.82.043009, 2010.
Chilingarian, A., Hovsepyan, G., and Hovhannisyan, A.:
Particle bursts from thunderclouds: Natural particle ac-
celerators above our heads, Phys. Rev. D, 83, 062001,
https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevD.83.062001, 2011.
Chilingarian, A., Mailyan, B., and Vanyan, L.: Recovering
of the energy spectra of electrons and gamma rays com-
ing from the thunderclouds, Atmos. Res., 114–115, 1–16,
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.atmosres.2012.05.008, 2012.
Chilingarian, A., Chilingaryan, S., and Reymers, A.: Atmospheric
discharges and particle fluxes, J. Geophys. Res.-Space, 120,
5845–5853, https://doi.org/10.1002/2015JA021259, 2015.
Chilingarian, A., Hovsepyan, G., and Kozliner, L.:
Extensive air showers, lightning, and hunderstorm
ground enhancements, Astropart. Phys., 82, 21–35,
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.astropartphys.2016.04.006, 2016.
Chilingarian, A., Chilingaryan, S., Karapetyan, T., Kozliner,
L., Khanikyants, Y. Hovsepyan, G., Pokhsraryan, D., and
Soghomonyan, S.: On the initiation of lightning in thunder-
clouds, Sci. Rep., 7, 1371, https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-017-
01288-0, 2017a.
Chilingarian, A., Khanikyants, Y., Mareev, E., Pokhsraryan, D.,
Rakov, V. A., and Soghomonyan, S.: Types of lightning dis-
charges that abruptly terminate enhanced fluxes of energetic
radiation and particles observed at ground level, J. Geophys.
Res.-Atmos., 122, 7582, https://doi.org/10.1002/2017JD026744,
2017b.
Atmos. Chem. Phys., 22, 7959–7973, 2022
7972
Chilingarian, A., Hovsepyan, G., Soghomonyan, S., Za-
zyan, M., and Zelenyy, M.: Structures of the intracloud
electric field supporting origin of long-lasting thunder-
storm ground enhancements, Phys. Rev. D, 98, 082001,
https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevD.98.082001, 2018.
Chilingarian, A., Soghomonyan, S., Khanikyanc, Y.,
and Pokhsraryan, D.: On the origin of particle fluxes
from thunderclouds, Astropart. Phys., 105, 54–62,
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.astropartphys.2018.10.004, 2019.
Chilingarian, A., Hovsepyan, G., and Sargsyan, B.: Circula-
tion of Radon progeny in the terrestrial atmosphere dur-
ing thunderstorms, Geophys. Res. Lett., 47, e2020GL091155,
https://doi.org/10.1029/2020GL091155, 2020a.
Chilingarian, A., Khanikyants, Y., Rakov, V. A., and Soghomonyan,
S.: Termination of thunderstorm-related bursts of ener-
getic radiation and particles by inverted intracloud and
hybrid lightning discharges, Atmos. Res., 233, 104713,
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.atmosres.2019.104713, 2020b.
Chilingarian, A., Karapetyan, T., Zazyan, M., Hovsepyan,
G., Sargysan, B., Nikolova, N., Angelov, H., Chum,
Jaroslav, and Langer, R.: Maximum strength of the at-
mospheric electric field, Phys. Rev. D, 103, 043021,
https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevD.103.043021, 2021.
Chum, J., Langer, R., Baše, J., Kollárik, M., Strhárský, I., Diendor-
fer, G., and Rusz, J.: Significant enhancements of secondary cos-
mic rays and electric field at the high mountain peak of Lomnický
Štít in High Tatras during thunderstorms, Earth Planets Space,
72, 28, https://doi.org/10.1186/s40623-020-01155-9, 2020.
Clothiaux, E. E., Miller, M. A., Albrecht, B. A., Ackerman, T. P.,
Verlinde, J., Babb, D. M., Peters, R. M., and Syrett, W. J.: An
Evaluation of a 94-GHz Radar for Remote Sensing of Cloud
Properties, J. Atmos. Ocean. Technol. 12, 201–229, 1995.
Daidzic, N. E.: A new model for lifting condensation levels es-
timation, International Journal of Aviation, Aeronautics, and
Aerospace, 6, 1–17, https://doi.org/10.15394/ijaaa.2019.1341,
2019.
Dwyer J. R. and Uman, M. A.: The physics of lightning, Phys. Rep.,
534, 147–241, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.physrep.2013.09.004,
2014.
Dwyer, J. R., Smith, D. M., and Cummer, S. A.: High-
energy atmospheric physics: Terrestrial gamma-ray flashes
and related phenomena, Space Sci. Rev., 173, 133–
196,https://doi.org/10.1007/s11214-012-9894-0, 2012.
Eack, K. B., Beasley, W. H., Rust, W. D., Marshall, T. C., and
Stolzenburg, M.: Initial results from simultaneous observation of
X-rays and electric fields in a thunderstorm, J. Geophys. Res.,
101, 29637–29640, https://doi.org/10.1029/96JD01705, 1996.
Görsdorf, U., Lehmann, V., Bauer-Pfundstein, M., Peters, G.,
Vavriv, D., Vinogradov, V., and Volkov, V.: A 35-GHz Polari-
metric Doppler Radar for Long-Term Observations of Cloud Pa-
rameters – Description of System and Data Processing, J. Atmos.
Ocean. Technol., 32, 675–690, 2015.
Gossard, E. E.: Measurement of Cloud Droplet Size Spectra by
Doppler Radar, J. Atmos. Ocean. Technol., 11, 712–726, 1994.
Gurevich, A. V., Milikh, G. M., and Roussel-Dupre, R.: Runaway
electron mechanism of air breakdown and preconditioning dur-
ing a thunderstorm, Phys. Lett. A, 165, 463–468, 1992.
Iida, K., Kohama, A., and Oyamatsu, K.: Formula for Proton–
Nucleus Reaction Cross Section at Intermediate Ener-
Atmos. Chem. Phys., 22, 7959–7973, 2022
I. Kolmašová et al.: Gamma glow observed at low altitude
gies and Its Application, J. Phys. Soc. Jpn., 76, 044201,
https://doi.org/10.1143/JPSJ.76.044201, 2007.
Iudin, D. I., Rakov, V. A., Mareev, E. A., Iudin, F. D., Syssoev, A.
A., and Davydenko, S. S.: Advanced numerical model of light-
ning development: Application to studying the role of LPCR in
determining lightning type, J. Geophys. Res.-Atmos., 122, 6416–
6430, https://doi.org/10.1002/2016JD026261, 2017.
Kašpar, M., Müller, M., Crhová, L., E., Polášek, J. F., Pop,
L., and Valeriánová, A.: Relationship between Czech wind-
storms and air temperature, Int. J. Climatol., 37, 11–24,
https://doi.org/10.1002/joc.4682, 2017.
Kašpar, P., Santolík, O., and Kolmašová, I.: Unipolar
and bipolar pulses emitted during the development of
lightning flashes, Geophys. Res. Lett., 42, 7206–7213,
https://doi.org/10.1002/2015GL064777, 2015.
Kelley, N. A., Smith, D. M., Dwyer, J. R. Splitt M., Lazarus, S.,
Martinez-McKinney, H., Hazelton, B., Grefenstette, B., Lowell,
A., and Rassoul, H. K.: Relativistic electron avalanches as a thun-
derstorm discharge competing with lightning, Nat. Commun., 6,
7845, https://doi.org/10.1038/ncomms8845, 2015.
Kochkin, P., van Deursen, A. P. J., Marisaldi, M., Ursi, A.,
de Boer, A. I., Bardet, Allasia, C., Boissin, J.-F., Flourens,
F., and Østgaard, N.: In-flight observation of gamma ray
glows by ILDAS, J. Geophys. Res.-Atmos., 122, 12801–12811,
https://doi.org/10.1002/2017JD027405, 2017.
Kochkin, P., Sarria, D., Lehtinen, N., Mezentsev, A., Yang, S.,
Genov, G., Ullaland, K., Marisaldi, M., Østgaard, N., Chris-
tian, H. J., Grove, J. E., Quick, M., Al-Nussirat, S., and Wulf,
E.: A rapid gamma-ray glow flux reduction observed from
20 km altitude, J. Geophys. Res.-Atmos., 126, e2020JD033467,
https://doi.org/10.1029/2020JD033467, 2021.
Kollias, P., Albrecht, B. A., Lhermitte, R., and Savtchenko, A.:
Radar Observations of Updrafts, Downdrafts, and Turbulence in
Fair-Weather Cumuli, J. Atmos. Sci., 58, 1750–1766, 2001.
Kollias, P., Clothiaux, E. E., Miller, M. A., Albrecht, B. A.,
Stephens, G. L., and Ackerman, T. P.: Millimeter-Wavelength
Radars: New Frontier in Atmospheric Cloud and Precipitation
Research, B. Am. Meteorol. Soc., 88, 1608–1624, 2007.
Kolmašová, I.: data_acp-2022-125, Mendeley Data, V1 [data set],
https://doi.org/10.17632/p27tzscvb3.1, 2022.
Kolmašová, I. and Santolík, O.: Properties of unipolar magnetic
field pulse trains generated by lightning discharges, Geophys.
Res. Lett., 40, 1637–1641, https://doi.org/10.1002/grl.50366,
2013.
Kolmašová, I., Santolík, O., Defer, E., Rison, W., Coquillat,
S., Pedeboy, S., Lán, R., Uhlíř, L., Lambert, D., Pinty,
J.-P., Prieur, S., and Pont, V.: Lightning initiation: Strong
VHF radiation sources accompanying preliminary break-
down pulses during lightning initiation, Sci. Rep., 8, 3650,
https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-018-21972-z, 2018.
Kolmašová, I., Santolík, O., Defer, E., Kašpar, P., Kolínská, A.,
Pedeboy, S., and Coquillat, S.: Two propagation scenarios of
isolated breakdown lightning processes in failed negative cloud-
to-ground flashes, Geophys. Res. Lett., 47, e2020GL090593,
https://doi.org/10.1029/2020GL090593, 2020.
Kolmašová, I., Soula, S., Santolík, O., Farges, T., Bousquet, O., Di-
endorfer, G., Lán, R., and Uhlíř, L.: A frontal thunderstorm with
several multi-cell lines found to produce energetic preliminary
https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-22-7959-2022
I. Kolmašová et al.: Gamma glow observed at low altitude
breakdown, J. Geophys. Res.-Atmos., 127, e2021JD035780,
https://doi.org/10.1029/2021JD035780, 2022.
Kudela, K., Chum, J., Kollárik, M., Langer, R., Strhárský, I., and
Baše, J.: Correlations between secondary cosmic ray rates and
strong electric fields at Lomnický štít, J. Geophys. Res.-Atmos.,
122, 10700–10710, https://doi.org/10.1002/2016JD026439,
2017.
Kuroda, Y., Oguri, S., Kato, Y., Nakata, R., Inoue, Y., Ito, C.,
and Minowa, M.: Observation of gamma ray bursts at ground
level under the thunderclouds, Phys. Lett. B, 758, 286–291,
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.physletb.2016.05.029, 2016.
Lawrence, M. G.: The Relationship between Relative Humidity
and the Dew point Temperature in Moist Air: A Simple Con-
version and Applications, B. Am. Meteorol. Soc., 86, 225–234,
https://doi.org/10.1175/BAMS-86-2-225, 2005.
Nag, A. and Rakov, V. A.: Some inferences on the role
of lower positive chargé region in facilitating differ-
ent types of lightning, Geophys. Res. Lett., 36, L05815,
https://doi.org/10.1029/2008GL036783, 2009.
Novák, P.: The Czech Hydrometeorological Institute’s se-
vere storm nowcasting systém, Atmos. Res., 83, 450–457,
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.atmosres.2005.09.014, 2007.
Novak, P. and Kyznarova, H.: Long-term characteristics of con-
vective storms in terms of radar data and lightning detection
data, Meteorological bulletin, Vol. 73, Czech Hydrometeorolog-
ical Institute, Press and Information Department, ISSN 0026-
1173, 2020.
Østgaard, N., Christian, H. J., Grove, J. E., Sarria, D., Mezent-
sev, A., Kochkin, P., Lehtinen, N., Quick, M., Al-Nussirat,
S., Wulf, E., Genov, G., Ullaland, K., Marisaldi, M., Yang,
S., and Blakeslee, R. J.: Gamma ray glow observations at
20-km altitude, J. Geophys. Res.-Atmos., 124, 7236–7254,
https://doi.org/10.1029/2019JD030312, 2019.
Parks, G., Mauk, K. B. H., Spiger, R, and Chin, J.: X-ray en-
hancements detected during thunderstorm and lightning activi-
ties, Geophys. Res. Lett., 8, 1176–1179, 1981.
Rakov, V. A.: Fundamentals of Lightning, Cambridge University
Press, Cambridge, UK, ISBN 978-1-107-07223-7, 2016.
Rakov, V. A. and Uman, M. A.: Lightning – Physics and effects,
Cambridge University Press, ISBN 9780521583275, 2003.
Rakov, V. A., Thottappillil, R., and Uman, M. A.: Electric field
pulses in K and M changes of lightning ground flashes, J. Geo-
phys. Res., 97, 9935–9950, 1992.
Ryzhkov, A. V. and Zrnic, D. S.: Radar Polarimetry for Weather
Observations, Springer, Berlin/Heidelberg, Germany, vol. 486,
ISBN 978-3-030-05093-1, 2019.
Sato, T.: Analytical Model for Estimating Terrestrial Cosmic
Ray Fluxes Nearly Anytime and Anywhere in the World:
Extension of PARMA/EXPACS, PLOS ONE, 10, e0144679,
https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0144679, 2015.
Sato, T.: Analytical Model for Estimating the Zenith Angle De-
pendence of Terrestrial Cosmic Ray Fluxes, PLOS ONE, 11,
e0160390, https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0160390, 2016.
Sato, T., Iwamoto, Y., Hashimoto, S., Ogawa, T., Furuta, T., Abe,
S., Kai, T., Tsai, P.-E., Matsuda, N., Iwase, H., Shigyo, N., Si-
hver, L., and Niita, K.: Features of Particle and Heavy Ion Trans-
port code System (PHITS) version 3.02, J. Nucl. Sci. Technol.,
55, 684–690, https://doi.org/10.1080/00223131.2017.1419890,
2018.
https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-22-7959-2022
7973
Schwalt, L., Pack, S., and Schulz, W.: Ground truth
data of atmospheric discharges in correlation with
LLS detections, Electr. Pow. Syst. Res., 180, 106065,
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.epsr.2019.106065, 2020.
Shepetov, A., Antonova, V., Kalikulov, O. Kryakunova, O.,
Karashtin, A., Lutsenko, V., Mamina, S., Mukashev, K., Piscal,
V., Ptitsyn, M., Ryabov, V., Sadykov, T., Saduev, N. Salikhov, N.,
Shlyugaev, Y., Vildanova, L., Zhukov, V., and Gurevich, A.: The
prolonged gamma ray enhancement and the short radiation burst
events observed in thunderstorms at Tien Shan, Atmos. Res., 248,
105266, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.atmosres.2020.105266, 2021.
Shupe, M. D., Kollias, P., Matrosov, S. Y., and Schneider, T. L.: De-
riving Mixed-Phase Cloud Properties from Doppler Radar Spec-
tra, J. Atmos. Ocean. Technol. 21, 660–670, 2004.
Šlegl, J., Minářová, J., Kuča, P., Kolmašová, I., Santolík, O., Sokol,
Z., Reitz, G., Ambrožová, I., and Ploc, O.: Response of the Czech
RMN network to thunderstorm activity, Radiat. Prot. Dosim.,
186, 215–218, 2019.
Soghomonyan, S., Chilingarian, A., and Khanikyants, Y.:
Dataset for Thunderstorm Ground Enhancements termi-
nated by lightning discharges, Mendeley Data, V1 [data set],
https://doi.org/10.17632/p25bb7jrfp.1, 2021.
Sokol, Z., Minářová, J., and Novák, P.: Classification of Hydrome-
teors Using Measurements of the Ka-Band Cloud Radar Installed
at the Milešovka Mountain (Central Europe), Remote Sens., 10,
1674, https://doi.org/10.3390/rs10111674, 2018.
Sokol, Z., Minářová, J., and Fišer, O.: Hydrometeor Distribu-
tion and Linear Depolarization Ratio in Thunderstorms, Remote
Sens., 12, 2144, https://doi.org/10.3390/rs12132144, 2020.
Takahashi, T.: Riming Electrification as a Charge Gen-
eration Mechanism in Thunderstorms, J. Atmos.
Sci., 35, 1536–1548, https://doi.org/10.1175/1520-
0469(1978)035<1536:REAACG>2.0.CO;2, 1978.
Torii, T., Sugita, T., Tanabe, S., Kimura, Y., Kamogawa, M., Yajima,
K., and Yasuda, H.: Gradual increase of energetic radiation asso-
ciated with thunderstorm activity at the top of Mt. Fuji, Geophys.
Res. Lett., 36, L13804, https://doi.org/10.1029/2008GL037105,
2009.
Tsuchiya, H., Enoto, T., Yamada, S., Yuasa, T., Nakazawa, K.,
Kitaguchi, T., Kawaharada, M., Kokubun, M., Kato, H., Okano,
M., and Makishima, K.: Long duration γ ray emissions from
2007 and 2008 winter thunderstorms, J. Geophys. Res., 116,
D09113, https://doi.org/10.1029/2010JD015161, 2011.
Wilson, C. T. R.: The acceleration of particles in strong electric
fields such as those of thunderclouds, Proc. Cambridge Philos.
Soc., 22, 534–538, 1925.
Zhou, X. X., Wang, X. J., Huang, D. H., and Jia, H. Y.: Effect of
near-earth thunderstorms electric field on the intensity of ground
cosmic ray positrons/electrons in Tibet, Astropart. Phys., 84,
107–114, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.astropartphys.2016.08.004,
2016.
Atmos. Chem. Phys., 22, 7959–7973, 2022